No abstract

This study was conducted to determine the goodness of fit of Gompertz, Logistic, Von Bertalanffy, Richards, Levakovich and Janoschek growth models in Japanese quail. Therefore, weekly live-weight data obtained from 372 females and 339 males were fitted. Females' live weights were found to be higher than that of males, and the first divergence in the growth of female and male birds occurred in 21-28 days, and it survived until the experiment (P < .001). The coefficient of determination (R 2), adjusted coefficient of determination (adj. R 2), mean square error (MSE), Akaike's information criteria (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) were used to determine the best growth model. R 2 and adjusted R 2 values of the growth models were similar and close to 1, indicating that all models perform well in describing age-related changes in live weight in quail. Based on the MSE, AIC and BIC values, Richards model was determined to be the best fitting model to the growth data of both sexes. Consequently, it has been demonstrated that Richards function which has a flexible structure in terms of inflection point is the most appropriate growth function for both female and male birds.

No abstract

The COST action “Standardising output-based surveillance to control non-regulated diseases of cattle in the European Union (SOUND control),” aims to harmonise the results of surveillance and control programmes (CPs) for non-EU regulated cattle diseases to facilitate safe trade and improve overall control of cattle infectious diseases. In this paper we aimed to provide an overview on the diversity of control for these diseases in Europe. A non-EU regulated cattle disease was defined as an infectious disease of cattle with no or limited control at EU level, which is not included in the European Union Animal health law Categories A or B under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2002. A CP was defined as surveillance and/or intervention strategies designed to lower the incidence, prevalence, mortality or prove freedom from a specific disease in a region or country. Passive surveillance, and active surveillance of breeding bulls under Council Directive 88/407/EEC were not considered as CPs. A questionnaire was designed to obtain country-specific information about CPs for each disease. Animal health experts from 33 European countries completed the questionnaire. Overall, there are 23 diseases for which a CP exists in one or more of the countries studied. The diseases for which CPs exist in the highest number of countries are enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, bovine viral diarrhoea and anthrax (CPs reported by between 16 and 31 countries). Every participating country has on average, 6 CPs (min–max: 1–13) in place. Most programmes are implemented at a national level (86%) and are applied to both dairy and non-dairy cattle (75%). Approximately one-third of the CPs are voluntary, and the funding structure is divided between government and private resources. Countries that have eradicated diseases like enzootic bovine leukosis, bluetongue, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis and bovine viral diarrhoea have implemented CPs for other diseases to further improve the health status of cattle in their country. The control of non-EU regulated cattle diseases is very heterogenous in Europe. Therefore, the standardising of the outputs of these programmes to enable comparison represents a challenge.